<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: The Comprehensive, Expert Guide to C# 7.0	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://intellitect.com/innovative-products/essentialcsharp7/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://intellitect.com/innovative-products/essentialcsharp7/</link>
	<description>Complex Software Development - Simplified</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2023 01:03:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Mark Michaelis		</title>
		<link>https://intellitect.com/innovative-products/essentialcsharp7/#comment-381043</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Michaelis]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2020 03:32:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://intellitect.com/?page_id=19321#comment-381043</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://intellitect.com/innovative-products/essentialcsharp7/#comment-380400&quot;&gt;mehdi&lt;/a&gt;.

Hi mehdi,
By variable I assume you mean &quot;local variable&quot;?  While local variables may not be initialized when declared, you cannot retrieve a value from a &quot;variable&quot; without assigning it first - the compiler will prevent it.  In summary, therefore, &quot;instance field&quot; is the correct term.  Technically, it could be expanded to include automatically implemented properties (which internally have instance fields).  In other words, the static vs. instance only relates to instance data (at the class level).
Thanks,
Mark]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://intellitect.com/innovative-products/essentialcsharp7/#comment-380400">mehdi</a>.</p>
<p>Hi mehdi,<br />
By variable I assume you mean &#8220;local variable&#8221;?  While local variables may not be initialized when declared, you cannot retrieve a value from a &#8220;variable&#8221; without assigning it first &#8211; the compiler will prevent it.  In summary, therefore, &#8220;instance field&#8221; is the correct term.  Technically, it could be expanded to include automatically implemented properties (which internally have instance fields).  In other words, the static vs. instance only relates to instance data (at the class level).<br />
Thanks,<br />
Mark</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: mehdi		</title>
		<link>https://intellitect.com/innovative-products/essentialcsharp7/#comment-380400</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[mehdi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2020 12:13:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://intellitect.com/?page_id=19321#comment-380400</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hi Mark.
I am reading Essential C# 7.0 in learning.oreilly.com , this is fantastic book and I enjoy it.
In chapter 6 on Static Fields section written &quot;Unlike with instance fields, if no initialization for a static field is provided, the static field will automatically be assigned its default value (0, null, false, and so on)&quot;.
I think instead of saying &quot;instance fields&quot; it is correct to say &quot;instance variables&quot;.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Mark.<br />
I am reading Essential C# 7.0 in learning.oreilly.com , this is fantastic book and I enjoy it.<br />
In chapter 6 on Static Fields section written &#8220;Unlike with instance fields, if no initialization for a static field is provided, the static field will automatically be assigned its default value (0, null, false, and so on)&#8221;.<br />
I think instead of saying &#8220;instance fields&#8221; it is correct to say &#8220;instance variables&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Mark		</title>
		<link>https://intellitect.com/innovative-products/essentialcsharp7/#comment-211931</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2015 02:15:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://intellitect.com/?page_id=19321#comment-211931</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://intellitect.com/innovative-products/essentialcsharp7/#comment-205681&quot;&gt;Miles&lt;/a&gt;.

Hi Miles... The reason for the reduced page count is because we eliminated an appendix chapter on Multithreading prior to C# 5.0 and moved it to a download exclusively.  I believe this material is even more dated than it was for Essential C# 5.0 such that printing it was not of sufficient value to the reader.  As it turns out, we did add pages for C# 6.0 but without removing any the book would have been too long for the binding - so it is a good thing we cut the appendix anyway. :)
Thanks!
Mark]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://intellitect.com/innovative-products/essentialcsharp7/#comment-205681">Miles</a>.</p>
<p>Hi Miles&#8230; The reason for the reduced page count is because we eliminated an appendix chapter on Multithreading prior to C# 5.0 and moved it to a download exclusively.  I believe this material is even more dated than it was for Essential C# 5.0 such that printing it was not of sufficient value to the reader.  As it turns out, we did add pages for C# 6.0 but without removing any the book would have been too long for the binding &#8211; so it is a good thing we cut the appendix anyway. :)<br />
Thanks!<br />
Mark</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Miles		</title>
		<link>https://intellitect.com/innovative-products/essentialcsharp7/#comment-205681</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Miles]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2015 17:34:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://intellitect.com/?page_id=19321#comment-205681</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I noticed on Amazon that the 6.0 book is 24 pages shorter than 5.0 even though one would expect more content. I realize there are many reasons that could account for this but I was curious if anything was removed since the previous edition, and if so, what exactly? I was just going to sell my 5.0 book but I&#039;m hesitant to do so if there&#039;s anything exclusive in it.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I noticed on Amazon that the 6.0 book is 24 pages shorter than 5.0 even though one would expect more content. I realize there are many reasons that could account for this but I was curious if anything was removed since the previous edition, and if so, what exactly? I was just going to sell my 5.0 book but I&#8217;m hesitant to do so if there&#8217;s anything exclusive in it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Mark		</title>
		<link>https://intellitect.com/innovative-products/essentialcsharp7/#comment-192071</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Sep 2015 03:19:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://intellitect.com/?page_id=19321#comment-192071</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://intellitect.com/innovative-products/essentialcsharp7/#comment-191691&quot;&gt;Steve Jacobs&lt;/a&gt;.

Hi Steven: The book is expected to be out in a couple weeks: Oct. 5th, 2016.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://intellitect.com/innovative-products/essentialcsharp7/#comment-191691">Steve Jacobs</a>.</p>
<p>Hi Steven: The book is expected to be out in a couple weeks: Oct. 5th, 2016.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Mark		</title>
		<link>https://intellitect.com/innovative-products/essentialcsharp7/#comment-192061</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Sep 2015 03:00:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://intellitect.com/?page_id=19321#comment-192061</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://intellitect.com/innovative-products/essentialcsharp7/#comment-188821&quot;&gt;Jan Fredrik Fallsen&lt;/a&gt;.

Please contact me at Mark@IntelliTect.com and we can discuss what approach would be best.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://intellitect.com/innovative-products/essentialcsharp7/#comment-188821">Jan Fredrik Fallsen</a>.</p>
<p>Please contact me at <a href="mailto:Mark@IntelliTect.com">Mark@IntelliTect.com</a> and we can discuss what approach would be best.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Steve Jacobs		</title>
		<link>https://intellitect.com/innovative-products/essentialcsharp7/#comment-191691</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Steve Jacobs]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Sep 2015 13:22:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://intellitect.com/?page_id=19321#comment-191691</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Is this book available yet? If not, when will it be published? Thanks!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is this book available yet? If not, when will it be published? Thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jan Fredrik Fallsen		</title>
		<link>https://intellitect.com/innovative-products/essentialcsharp7/#comment-188821</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jan Fredrik Fallsen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Sep 2015 19:56:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://intellitect.com/?page_id=19321#comment-188821</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Regarding translation to Norwegian:
2 years ago i started to translate Essentials C# 4.0 third edition, to Norwegian. I have now finished the translation, but i have not published it yet since i wanted to upgrade the book to Essentials C# 5.0 fourth edition, or Essential C# 6.0. I was reading an review by Ian Eliot regarding Essentials C# 5.0. He said that it was not much difference between Essentials C# 4.0 third edition - which i have translated, and Essentials C# 5.0 fourth edition. Now i need to know, what&#039;s best to do, upgrade the translation from Essential C# 4.0 to Essentials C# 5.0 fourth edition, or to Essentials C# 6.0? When vil Essentials C# 6.0 be published?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding translation to Norwegian:<br />
2 years ago i started to translate Essentials C# 4.0 third edition, to Norwegian. I have now finished the translation, but i have not published it yet since i wanted to upgrade the book to Essentials C# 5.0 fourth edition, or Essential C# 6.0. I was reading an review by Ian Eliot regarding Essentials C# 5.0. He said that it was not much difference between Essentials C# 4.0 third edition &#8211; which i have translated, and Essentials C# 5.0 fourth edition. Now i need to know, what&#8217;s best to do, upgrade the translation from Essential C# 4.0 to Essentials C# 5.0 fourth edition, or to Essentials C# 6.0? When vil Essentials C# 6.0 be published?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
